Subadra Randuparayil v. Shaji and Others

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR`** ``` & ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY ``` ``` MONDAY, THE 14[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 23RD PHALGUNA, 1943 ``` ## **`WA NO. 346 OF 2022`** ## **`AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 28473/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/PETITIONER:`** ``` SUBADRA AGED 79 YEARS, D/O.PAPPI, RANDUPARAYIL, KARUMADI VILLAGE, AMBALAPPUZHA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 688 561. ``` ``` BY ADVS. K.VINAYA RAVI KRISHNAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1SHAJI S/O.SUBADRA, RANDUPARAYIL, KARUMADI VILLAGE, THAKAZHI P.O. - 688 562. ``` ``` 2THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER AND TRIBUNAL FOR MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA - 688 013. ``` ``` 3THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR WELFARE AND PROTECTION OF SENIOR CITIZEN AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA - 688 001. ``` ``` SRI.K.P.HARISH, SR GP FOR R2 SRI.MANU ROY FOR R1 ``` ``` THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **W.A.No.346 of 2022** **2** ## **JUDGMENT** Dated this the 14[th] day of March, 2022 ## **S.Manikumar, C.J.** Being aggrieved by the judgment in W.P.(C)No.28473 of 2020 dated 26.07.2021, by which the writ court declined to interfere with Exhibits P3 and P4, instant writ appeal is filed. 2. Exhibit P3 is the proceedings of the Maintenance Tribunal, Alappuzha dated 11.10.2017, translated version of which reads thus: ## “ **Proceedings of Maintenance Tribunal, Alappuzha** (Present: S. Muraleedharan Pillai) KD IS-4543/17/E Date: 11.10.2017 Sub: Maintenance and welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act-2007 Order in Petition filed by Subhadra, Randu parayil, Karumadil Ref: Hearing conducted on 25.09.2017, 05.10.2017 ………………….. Smt. Subhadra residing at Randuparayil Veedu, Karumadi village, Alappuzha Taluk had preferred this case against her son as respondent under the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 before the Maintenance Tribunal stating that she had conveyed an extent of 36 cents of properties out of **W.A.No.346 of 2022** **3** which 26 cents as per sale deed and remaining 10 cents as settlement deed with her life Interest. Subsequently the respondent none other than the son had sold 26 cents and now the petitioner living alone in home and no other way for her livelihood and seeking cancellation of settlement deed executed by her in favour of her son. Both parties present in the hearing conducted as referred above and made their submission. It is submitted by the petitioner that she has been taken care of her elder daughter and she is residing in the family house and the younger son none other than the respondent neglected to take care even denied to give maintenance and it is inevitable to get back the 10 Cents of property which was settled her. Moreover the petitioner submitted that the respondent son obstructed the grand children who came for visit her and restrain her sons and daughters other than the respondent from entering the house. The respondent Shaji, submitted that for the last six months the mother had been living by keeping distance from him and till then he had taken care of the mother by took her with him. Further submitted that, now the petitioner mother residing in the house situated in the property of his own and he resided in a rental house and offered his readiness to give maintenance to his mother and alleged that his brother trying to grab the property availed to him by settlement deed and he is not ready to give back the property. As the mother is not willing to reside together with Shaji and also considering the present situation that now the petitioner freely residing in the **W.A.No.346 of 2022** **4** house situated in the property settled to the respondent, ordering as below. ## **ORDER** It is directed the respondent son Shaji to pay monthly amount of Rs.2000/- (Rupees Two Thousand Only) as maintenance amount and the amount should be remitted before 10 of every month failing which shall initiate legal proceedings under section 5(9) of the Act. Sd/Sd/Junior Superintendent Maintenance Tribunal” 3. Exhibit P4 dated 11.04.2018 is the proceeding of the Appellate Tribunal/District Magistrate, Alappuzha, translated version of the same is extracted: “File No DCALP/1783/2017/AT ## PROCEEDINGS OF APPELLATE TRIBUNAL /DISTRICT MAGISTRATE ALAPPUZHA CONSTITUTED UNDER MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS ACT 2007 TRIBUNAL ## No. N7/DCALP 1780/2017 Present : Anupama T.V. IAS Sub: regarding the order on appeal submitted by Smt.Subadra Randuparayil, Karumadi, Ambalappuzha, under Maintenance And Welfare Of Parents And Senior Citizens Act 2007. Reference: 1) application submitted by Smt. Subadra Randuparayil, Karumadi, Ambalappuzha **W.A.No.346 of 2022** **5** - 2) Order No.KDS4543/2017/E dated 11.10.2017 of Alappuzha Maintenance Tribunal. - 3) Hearings conducted on 13.9.2018 and - 21.2.2018 of appellant and respondent. - 4) Report No.325/2017 dated 4.12.2017 of Village Officer Karumady. - 5) File No. E4543/17 the proceedings of Sub Divisional Maintenance Tribunal, Alappuzha. Appellant: Smt.Subdra, randuparayil, Karumady village. Respondent: Sri.Shaji, Randuparayil, Karumady village. Reference-1 Appeal submitted under Welfare and Maintenance Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2017 and Rule 2009 against the reference 2 order. Subject matter of the appeal is that Respondent is a son of the appellant. Out of 36 cents of land owned by the appellant, she transferred 26 cents of land as sale deed and 10 cents of land as settlement deed preserving life interest to the respondent and request to cancel the settlement deed was not considered by the Sub Divisional Maintenance Tribunal Alappuzha. Reference NO3 hearing was conducted as a part of appeal proceedings. At the time of hearing appellant submitted that the settlement deed of 10 cents of land is to be cancelled and she is receiving maintenance amount as per ref. 2 order from the respondent. Respondent submitted that the appellant, who is the mother of the respondent has transferred 4.65 Ares of land as settlement deed, preserving life interest, as per **W.A.No.346 of 2022** **6** document No. 1137/2014 of SRO Ambalapuzha. He also submitted that he is residing in the house in the above property with family including the appellant and he has not obstructed appellant's free enjoyment of the property. Regarding the above complaint an enquiry was conducted through village officer, Karumady. The following order is passed accordingly. ## **Order** The order on ref. No. 1 appeal is pronounced after perusing the ref. 2-4 documents and proceedings file of sub divisional maintenance Tribunal, Alappuzha. It was clear from the depositions in the hearing that appellant is presently residing with the respondent and he has not obstructed appellant's free enjoyment of the property. Since Appellate tribunal was not convinced that the conditions of the transfer was violated and the primary aim of the appellate tribunal is to ensure the welfare and protection of the appellant, this appeal is dismissed confirming the ref. 2 order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Alappuzha. Since the ill-treatment of the respondent and wife is causing difficulties to the appellant, considering seriously the ref. 4 report of the District Social Justice Officer is relegated to take needful steps. ## Presiding Officer, Maintenance Tribunal & District Magistrate, Alappuzha.” 4. Adverting to the rival submissions, taking note of the recitals in Exhibit P1 and following the judgment of this court **W.A.No.346 of 2022** **7** in **Subhashini v. District Collector, Kozhikode** reported in 2020 (5) KLT 533 FB, writ court declined to interfere with the above said order. 5. Though Ms.K.Vinaya, learned counsel for the appellant sought for reversal of the judgment on the grounds raised, we find no merit in the appeal, as all the authorities have concurrently found that there is no recital in Exhibit P1, making the respondent liable to maintain the appellant. Nevertheless, the direction issued by the Tribunal to pay the maintenance @ Rs.2,000/- per month has been confirmed. 6. Having regard to the age and plight of the appellant, the respondent has voluntarily come forward to enhance the monthly maintenance from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.3,000/- per month and Mr.Manu Roy, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the enhanced maintenance of Rs.3,000/- will be paid from the month of April 2022. He further submitted that the maintenance as ordered by the authorities is being paid continuously without any default. Submission of the learned counsel for the respondent is placed on record. **W.A.No.346 of 2022** **8** 7. In the abovesaid circumstances, we dispose of the appeal, with a direction to the respondent to pay Rs.3,000/per month as maintenance to the appellant, commencing from April 2022. The said amount will be paid before the 5[th] of April 2022 and continuously, thereafter. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- **S.Manikumar Chief Justice** Sd/- **Shaji P.Chaly Judge** ## **vpv** //true copy// P.A. to Judge